stexpandedfandomcom-20200214-history
User talk:Sasoriza
Remember, always start new discussions at the bottom! Arcadia Starship Sidebar Love the colors you used on UFS Arcadia. Hope you don't mind that I stole the format for USS Sovereign (NCC-73811) seeing if it really grows on me before I go changing all the others to match. Once again - very cool! --Sneg 14:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC) *Thanks! No, I don't mind. I also thought it turned out pretty good. Color-matching yet contrasting the image is usually effective. Get a few more stats under "class" on ''Sovereign'' and it should look sweet. I also like that blue-white combo under Advance Starship Template on your discussion page; the UFP icon makes it work.--Sasorizaa1 16:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC) ::I based that (the Advance Starship Template) off US Navy ship side bar on the "Real" wiki. --Sneg 16:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC) Mirror Universe Wiki Just a curious question. Which version of how the Terran Empire rose to power do you subscribe to? I like the DC comic version which said everything was fine uptil the Earth/Romulan war and instead of fighting to a draw and forming the Neutral Zone - the Romulans invaded and enslaved Earth. Which lead to a rebellion and causing the Terrans to take the attidute of "never again" and became the Terran Empire we know in TOS. --Sneg 14:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC) :Having read that actual comic when it first came out back in the '80s, I accepted it as the best explanation in lieu of no other, but obviously "IAMD" refuted it. Whenever possible, I take aired material as canon. I started writing a timeline (which I've yet to finish) for my mirror sim, establishing its growth from the British Empire, in order to validate mirror-Archer's claim that the Empire had "endured for centuries" (which means it had to have been around for approximately two centuries, at least, before 2155 = 1955). Given the imperialist similarities, it made sense to me. Either way, there still isn't a lot of detail on how the Empire came to be, so there's really nothing to go on. Hopefully Mike Sussman's novella will answer the question next year. --Sasorizaa1 19:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC) Starship template Well it looks like I've got it working. Still don't know why the actual page looks messed up. I think it is something in the code for the table at the bottom of the page. Ready to say "the heck with it" at least the code works in the other articles. :-) --Sneg 19:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC) *Template talk:Starship-class *Template:Starship-sidebar :It's an esoteric syntax. Part of the problem is the STEUwiki CSS (stylesheet) (or lack of), inc. "class", "id", etc., which would solve some of these problems. This place really needs a dedicated stylesheet, as I've said before. --Sasorizaa1 19:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC) ::Thanks a million. A lot of my Wiki/HTML education is learned by "cut & paste" (followed by experimenting) :-) --Sneg 19:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC) BTW - I notice you like to have a "single line" of data for the Affiliation field. Where I normally make it two lines. You like to put "Federation Starfleet" where I'll put "Starfleet"(line break)"Federation". That's why I put in two fields of code in the Template. Figured the first line is the "navy" the ship serves and the "governement" they serve on the next line. We should probably come to a consensus before we begin a crusade to update all the ships. Personally I like the two line format - reminds me of an "address". --Sneg 18:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC) :I like it because it takes up less space. Ideally, websites should offer as much information as possible at a glance, and seeing that line break is (for me personally at least) disruptive--it makes me stop and realize I'm reading (which, like reading a book, is a cardinal sin--the reader is supposed to forget that they're reading). Plus linking each word invites the viewer with two more avenues for further exploration. As far as the arrangement, it makes more sense to say the "Federation Starfleet". One wouldn't call it the "Starfleet Federation". --Sasorizaa1 19:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC) ::I can tweak the code to fix that. Give me a day or so. (just discovered "World of Warcraft" the other day) :-) --Sneg 00:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC) Could you take a look at IKS B'Chnah and see what you think would be the best color combo for the sidebar. Once you've figured it out - I can make a Klingon Starship template. :-) You seem to have a good eye for colors. Thanks. --Sneg 17:50, 8 September 2006 (UTC) :Have a look. BTW, that link wasn't working before (check the history)--had to change the ' . Maybe that page should be moved to the new working link. --Sasoriza 20:25, 8 September 2006 (UTC) ::You have a GREAT EYE for the color scheme. Will work on a template in a couple hours (have to play "daddy" now) FYI - yeah I've noticed problems with " ' " vs " ’ " (you'll see the difference in the edit field) Don't know how it happens. --Sneg 00:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC) Template:Arc Character‎ You like that bit of code that lets you change the background behind the person's name don't you? I saw that being done on Star Wars characters on the main Wiki and looked into how it was done. :-) --Sneg 12:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC) :p.s. Shouldn't Security be in gold too? (for 24th Century) ::p.p.s. I've been eyeing your Template:Starc but haven't decided where to go with it. I like the idea of some sort of icon in the corner telling people at a glance what era you're looking at. In Arcadia continuity, after 2379, Security goes by burgundy (or dark red, whatever you want to call it), since Worf wore that color in Nemesis while he was obviously Security Chief. Sort of harkens back to TOS' redshirts (though with far less fatalities in our era :)). In a way it makes more sense, since Security and Tactical are tied together, yet Tactical (as in Strategic Ops) wore red; so both departments are branch-offs of Command (as in, Command Services). It's basically the difference between those whose duties carry an external (off-ship) focus (Cmd/Conn/Secy/Tac), and those whose focus is the vessel (or base) itself (Eng/Ops). If that makes sense. --Sasoriza 14:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC) :LOL no problem. As long as you have a plan. :-) --Sneg 14:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Kal-Dixas I noticed the heading on Drake Mallory. Is that the same Kal-Dixas sim that bellied up a couple years ago (I think)? I remember emailing the GM and being informed it was out of commission. Did anyone resurrect it? --Sasoriza 05:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC) :Yeah, it's that sim. Kal-Dixas has had a long and tortured history. It started off in the old FSG, then moved to AES when that group split off. I came into it a while after that, in 1997 or so. I served as GM for a while, until real life hit hard in a big way and I had to turn it over to someone else in 1999. Since then it's been up and down about a dozen times. I tried getting back into it in 2003, I think, but that was when it was falling apart again. And it really is a shame, because it was a great sim. Out of the 22 sims I've been involved with, I enjoyed Kal-Dixas the most. I keep hoping it can be resurrected again, but in the meantime, it'll show up in Pendragon every now and then. --TimPendragon 12:16, 13 September 2006 (UTC) ::Hey, you should remember me from AES then! (Arcadia.) You might be the very one I emailed. Good luck w/that. It always saddened me to see Trek sims from the old days collapse; I keep hoping some of them will resurface. Strengthens my resolve to keep mine going in these "Trekless" times. --Sasoriza 12:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC) Human vs. human I noticed (based on my watch list) that you removed the capital H from Human on two pages, while the other Star Trek wikis keep it capital. Shouldn't we keep it capital to not show favoritism? And for formatting issues of course, as alien species names are always capitalized. - Lieutenant Ayala 18:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC) :I was going by Wikipedia--and professional publications, where "human" has always been "human". Capitalizing an alien race name is different: For example, "Vulcan" refers to "Vulcans", which is the name of their planet. Our planet isn't called "Huma" or "Humania" or whatever. (Partly why "Terrans" crept into SF vernacular.) It's just common practice. I don't know who thought it started needing to be capitalized, or why. Human, as a rule, should only be capitalized at the beginning of a sentence. --Sasoriza 00:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)